BuzzerBeater Forums

I dont see any 5 star potential here

My scouts definitely made a better work last season, only one of the guys that I have scouted twice is of any interest at all. I have to hop to be lucky when picking between those that I only scouted once and that have 5*.

I am thinking of if it makes sence to believe that a guy that played more minutes has a better evaluation than one that just played a few. In other words, if I have to identical guys when it comes to ratings, would the the rating for the guy that played most minutes be more reliable? This will take some time and some guessing.

Last edited by chespirito at 4/21/2008 7:23:44 AM

Is it just my feeling or there are less bad players (1 and 2 balls) than last season?
Maybe it is to compensate for the lower potential?

I have some interesting and difficult choices-
A 5 star skill 2 star potential who went for 53 in his game.
A 3 star skill 3 star potential went for 39 and 14 in his game.
I only scouted 11 guys twice. Of those I have 1 four-, 4 three- and 6 two-star potentials. Next season I am definitely going to pay full $$ for the full report.

I scouted only few weeks on this season (I think that 3-4) and I see a one 5star player with a 4star potential, just luck:)

I don't see on other 5stars any potential - I have quite 7 of them, so it will be a lottery

Last edited by Iordanou at 4/21/2008 8:44:45 AM

I scouted 7 guys twice, and they're all 1 or 2 star potential...awesome.
And 9 of the 19 guys that I have a star rating of are 5 stars but with no other information, that's no fun.

Last edited by GM-namssor at 4/21/2008 8:57:33 AM

So knowing at least age and height of the players is out of the question huh?

:(

well, it's my first season, so i can't compare the new draft system to the old one, but as far as i'm concerned, i like the the 'new' system, although i have a few questions.
first off all, i want to know how accurate the star rating, the grade rating and the potential is. i don't expect that this is too acurrate, but would be nice to know, if a 2 star rating could be better than a 5 star rating, or if that this is impossible (or nearly impossible). i'm just curios because is scouted a point guard twice (star rating 2, grade D, potential 1) but he went for 36 points on 14 of 17 shooting. i know, i know, it's only one game, but 14 of 17, that's very impressive. on the other hand, there's a 5 star rating center who pulls down 0 (zero!!!!!!) rebounds in an 27 minutes effort.
so, would be nice to know, how strong i should consider the given ratings, like could a scouted 1 potential be an all star, could a 5 star rating center be a eddy curry like guy or could a 2 star rating pg with grade D be the next cp3 (i'm still impressed, 14 of 17... O_o).
So, the other question is, i scouted the players 1 to 27 (1 to 7 twice). So, is every one in my league scoting the low number players first??? so, players above 40 something wouldn't be scouted at all and everyone had to take there best guess. and is my player 1 the player 1 on everyones scouting report.
I'm sorry, if some of this had been already discussed, i read some parts, but not all with all this debates about injuries..,
thanks

Not sure I understand this scouts.
I have few 5 star players which actually played a very bad game (according to their statistics of course).
Why do they get these 5 stars?
For example:
A center
26 2 - 11 0 - 2 4 - 6 3 6 0 2 0 2 0 8
this one actually has 5 star potential.

another example:
Center
23 1 - 6 1 - 1 1 - 1 1 4 2 3 1 2 1 4

Oh, that will be a really interesting draft for you as you are low in the picking order. According to my (very limited) statistical investigation you still have quite a good chance to pick him though. Best of luck!

A center
26 2 - 11 0 - 2 4 - 6 3 6 0 2 0 2 0 8
this one actually has 5 star potential.

He might have respectable ID and Reb and SB and a bit lower IS... ratings are more important than the box score, as far as I am concerned.
But the box score might help to understand the skill distribution :)